the location of their release in the air
or in water-supply reservoirs. If placed
in appropriate locations and in sufficient quantity, they should be able to
provide an earlier warning of potential
threats than do most manual methods. However, we are not even remotely
close to achieving such functionality,
making biosensors a promising but
distant dream.

CONCLUSION

Continued and tireless contributions
to the field of biomedical research by
scientists is critical for combatting
the biological threats that keep coming our way, with technology playing
a key role in the actual application of
these discoveries. The invention of
something new is always associated
with recognition that much is still
unknown. As biomedical researchers
advance in this field and get better at
fighting bugs, the more those bugs
evolve and the deadlier they get. The
public health repertoire of emergency
services still lacks the tools to guarantee protection against all possible
biological hazards. Technologies like
disease-surveillance systems are one
of many possible answers to this public health challenge. An alliance between science and technology is shaping up as a critical tool in the pursuit
of overcoming the possible biological
crises just waiting to happen. To all
the techies out there, this is an open
invitation on behalf of researchers …
Come over to the dark side.

ther spread and antibiotic treatment
for those already affected. The Sverdlovsk anthrax leak in the Russian city
of Sverdlovsk (today Yekaterinburg) in
1979, nicknamed the “biological Cher-nobyl,” is evidence that reliable systems capable of detecting a possible
event are a necessity for both science
and public order. Conventional analysis of symptomatic data collected by
physicians and laboratories is insufficient and lacks the expansiveness
required for timely detection of such
attacks. As with Sverdlovsk, individual
physicians sometimes actually dismiss initial symptoms as non-lethal
unless a pattern prevails, but by then,
it is often too late.

Syndromic surveillance of signs
and symptoms is generated by the
volunteer effort of public health
workers and health-care personnel in
hospital emergency rooms. Although
this method works, the personnel requirement makes it less feasible and
difficult for public health agencies
to execute round the clock. The Real-time Outbreak and Disease Surveillance system, or RODS, is a computer-based system that lets doctors and
scientists monitor recurring patterns
of symptoms, helping them track possible epidemics or even bioterrorism
attempts. [ 3] First installed in Utah
during the 2002 Winter Olympics and
currently used in Utah and Pennsylvania, RODS is an open source project
involving computer-based syndromic
surveillance. When patients arrive at
a health-care provider, their personal
information and residential location
are recorded, along with the primary
health issue that brought them in.
RODS obtains this information from
different locations every few hours
and analyzes it to look for any unusual patterns of symptoms. If a certain
location reports a pattern of symptoms, RODS generates an alert and
sends it to its users, prompting them
to investigate further. While similar to Google Flu, RODS obtains data
from certified medical practitioners
and analyzes it in real time, making it
more reliable compared to the Google
Flu approach.

Another example is the National
Notifiable Disease Surveillance System
operated under the auspices of the U.S.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which collaborates with local,
state, and territorial health departments to create and maintain a compilation of disease-related public health
information. This is made possible by
enforcing mandatory reporting of diseases by health-care providers, laboratories, and public health departments
if specific symptoms are identified.
Sharing the resultant data with public
health departments every where allows
better monitoring, control, and prevention of possible outbreaks.

Biosensors are a promising alternative to symptom-based observation.
Currently used in applications ranging
from food production to glucose-mon-itoring devices, they provide an accurate and easy-to-operate alternative to
manual-inspection methods. Instead
of recording and analyzing the symptoms of infection, biosensors are designed to detect the presence of harmful biological substances directly. They
can be designed to probe for markers
specific to the pathogen of interest, including cell-wall components, toxins,
and genetic material. For instance,
biosensor assays have been developed
for clinical testing of the Dengue virus,
with the aim of overcoming limitations associated with manual methods
of detection. [ 4] However, no biosen-sor-based concept is close to commercialization today. For biosensors to
become a valuable addition to the
public health arsenal, they need to be
deployed in the environment in large
numbers to detect biological agents at